The Cincinnati Retirement System board is thinking about getting out of the pension business.

The idea of moving city employees into the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System was discussed and recommended by the board’s benefits committee on Thursday. But the full board decided only to explore the possibility.

CRS executive director Paula Tilsley said the main obstacle to such a move is the Cincinnati system’s financial shape and liabilities. CRS has only 60 cents of every dollar it owes to active employees and retirees. The city’s pension system would need to be in better shape in order for OPERS to take it over.

In the early 2000s, the plan was nearly 100 percent funded.

The move would be significant, solve some problems but also have drawbacks. Although Cincinnati is the only city in Ohio with its own pension system for non-police and fire employees, it was also the first to provide retirement benefits to employees.

The main advantage to moving Cincinnati employees into OPERS would be that the city could no longer short the system. Since at least 2003, council has underfunded the pension plan by varying amounts compared with what actuaries say should have been contributed.

If Cincinnati employees were moved to OPERS, the city would have to pay a share determined by that system each year. If it didn’t, OPERS would take the money out of the city’s coffers.

However, the city could no longer control funding and benefit levels; those would be determined at the state level.

Having OPERS eventually take over is part of the case the pension board could use to convince the City Council to inject more money into the system, Tilsley told the board.

“The sooner we get it up to full funding, the sooner OPERS can take it over,” she said, adding that half of the members of the current City Council have asked about shifting city pensioners to OPERS. “Maybe we can get there sooner rather than later.”

Some board members were receptive to the idea.

“The (pension) board can’t hold Council accountable,” said board member Bev Nussman. “This isn’t something that plays well to voters. It doesn’t affect them directly.”

Others were skeptical. Tom West, a board member elected by city employees, noted the once-healthy shape of the system and said the city shouldn’t give up on the system considering the Great Recession caused most of the losses.

Tilsley said she has had informal discussions with the executive director of OPERS but the city has approached it before without being committed.

“They would be very willing to talk to us,” Tilsley said.

There may be a political incentive as well at the state level to see the Cincinnati system succeed, Tilsley said.

Board members believe national groups who believe public employees should have defined contribution 401(k)-style system instead of defined benefit pension systems are behind the November ballot initiative to force Cincinnati’s system to change from a defined benefit to a defined contribution plan.

Like CRS, OPERS is a defined benefit system in which employees and employers make contributions that are pooled and invested and employees are promised a certain monthly payout based on a formula.

“These groups are also ramping up to try to go after the state level programs,” Tilsley said.